Motion to Strike in Indiana

What Is a Motion to Strike?

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion to Strike

“Indiana Trial Rule 12(F) permits a trial court to order stricken from any pleading any insufficient claim or defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." (See Raylu Enters. v. City of Noblesville (2023) 205 N.E.3d 260, 262.)

“Trial Rule 12(F) governs the striking of such material.” (See Small v. Centocor, Inc. (2000) 731 N.E.2d 22, 30.)

“A motion to strike pursuant to Trial Rule 12(F) is properly utilized to attack the sufficiency of the complaint to state a redressable claim.” (See Exo v. DonLevy (In re Unsupervised Estate of Exo), Court of Appeals No. 18A-EU-3107, at *5 (Ind. App. May 22, 2019).)

Procedural Steps Involved in Filing a Motion to Strike

“Indiana Trial Rule 12(F) states that [u]pon motion made by a party before responding to a pleading, or, if no responsive pleading is permitted by these rules, upon motion made by a party within twenty [20] days after the service of the pleading upon him or at any time upon the court's own initiative, the court may order stricken from any pleading any insufficient claim or defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” (See Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Plunkitt (2015) 30 N.E.3d 786, n.7.)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion to Strike

“A trial court has broad discretion when it rules on a motion to strike.” (See Wood v. Scott Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs (2020) 162 N.E.3d 1105, 1108; Raylu Enters. v. City of Noblesville (2023) 205 N.E.3d 260, 262.)

“Generally, we review a trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence for an abuse of discretion.” (See Young v. Hood's Gardens, Inc. (2013) 2 N.E.3d 724, 728-29.)

“We reverse a trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence only if that decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court, or the reasonable, probable, and actual deductions to be drawn therefrom.” (See id.)

“Further, the trial court's decision will not be reversed unless prejudicial error is shown.” (See id.)

“Where, however, the motion to strike also involves legal interpretation of a statute, it presents a pure question of law which we review de novo.” (See id.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion to Strike

It is well settled that “a motion to strike is properly utilized to strike any insufficient claim or defense. In other words, a T.R. 12(F) motion to strike is a proper device to attack the sufficiency of the complaint to state a redressable claim.” (See Plunkitt v. DLJ Mortg. Capital Inc., Court of Appeals No. 32A01-1605-MF-951, at *14 (Ind. App. July 13, 2017).)

It is also well settled that “under federal practice, a motion to strike, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f) functions similarly to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), when the motion to strike is properly used to test legal sufficiency of an answer. Therefore, in federal practice it may be generally stated the motion to strike is the plaintiff's counterpart to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.” (See Anderson v. Anderson (1979) 399 N.E.2d 391, 407.)

Dockets for Motion to Strike in Indiana

Sort By

In the Matter of the Paternity of Ziar Mitchell

Filed

May 23, 2024

Status

Active

Court

Circuit

County

Marion County, IN

Case #